Is a popular non-D&D traditional fantasy RPG possible?

[Scribble]

I haven't read herough every post, so if someone already mentioned this, then forgive me... But:

I think part of what makes D&D so popular / such a big share of the market is that it's well, D&D. The rules of the game are less important then the fact that it's D&D.

D&D was (is?) a cultural phenomenom. Mention to someone that you play say, GURPS, and you get a "huh?" Mention to someone that you play D&D, and while they might not actually know what the game IS they at least recognize the name enough to call you a dork.

People not in the hobby already know of the hobby through D&D. If gaming became a mass market hobby, then possibly someone might have a chance at taking over the market through rules alone, but for right now at least, any game that wants to take D&D's place in the market would have to also break into the brand identity that D&D has.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Marketing and distribution, those are the keys.

/M

Whilst I agree with this, I don't agree that everything else is meaningless as a result. You need a product you can market to your target audience. To me it seems like a seriously human-o-centric product would be easier to market to a non-gamer audience than one which is full of bizarre hyperspecific wierdness. 4E isn't as "far out" as some games, and it avoids using stupid names for no reason (largely, Eladrin and Tieflings being the exception), but I don't think it's as marketable as an FRPG could be, potentially.

I think you want something that's marketed with a stress on the dashing, beautiful and bold heroes defeating the evil villains through cunning and daring, and that has attractive humans or pretty human-like beings in an exciting and tastefully-rendered setting (not a wierd blue cavern or a romance novel cover) doing something dramatic on the cover.

I don't think this potential game would "sink D&D", but I think a game of this style, with a reasonably broad potential for emulating and making gameable certain genres of fantasy would stand a good chance of creating it's own market rather than just squabbling with D&D over extant players. It's MM-equivalent would contain mostly human and "supernatural but talky" foes, rather than bizarre monsters, extraplanar killing machines and grunting humanoids.

The content, I really think, does matter to the marketability, or at least the customer retention after marketing it, I guess (because you could market D&D differently, misleadingly, but I don't think a lot of people would stick around).

 

[Maggan]

Whilst I agree with this, I don't agree that everything else is meaningless as a result.

Of course, as I noted, I agree. The game has to be good enough, but that is all. It doesn't have to sweat the details, because the details isn't what's keeping a game such as GURPS from fighting D&D for the crown of RPGs.

And again ... there are games out there that fulfill many of the things appearing on peoples wishlists. Heck, there was even a LotR roleplaying game, backed by one of the strongest media blitzes ever, which sustained interest in the LotR movies for years and years. And that didn't dent the D&D juggernaut, even though we had the standard races, more humano-centric monsters, no gonzo extraplanar adventures, no over the top cheese (well, not a lot, anyways).

Actually, to me that's a question worth exploring.

Why did the LotR roleplaying game not take the world by storm, given that it exhibits many of the traits asked for in this thread, and at the same time being backed by a gargantuan public interest in the setting?

/M

 

[xechnao]

Many products such as Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed, Iron Kingdoms, Pathfinder, Warhammer Fantasy, Runequest show that it is not just about marketing but quality of product. If something with enough overall quality comes in the market it will succeed.
The thing is that quality standards right now are pretty high. You must be really experienced IMO to be able to visualize what it might work to reach them and what not.

 

[Mercurius]

So in the end it is generally agreed that to compete with D&D, or at least thrive in the market, a game would have to, in no particular order:

1) Be well marketed and distributed.
2) Be good.
3) Be similar enough to D&D to cover the same basic territory.
4) Be distinct enough from D&D to have its own feel.
5) Include some new, innovative element previously unseen.

Is that the basic gist of it? Everything else seems like specific personal preferences.

Note one big problem with Fantasy Hearbreakers is the Not-Elves. These are character races that have many of the characteristics of D&D Elves, but are given a different name, so they are "obviously" not elves, and thus this game is different from D&D and everyone will want to play it because it is better than D&D and it will make me a million dollars and wait what do you mean no one is buying it?

Too true. One of my very favorite games, Talislanta, touts itself as being Elves-less, yet at least a few races are very Elves-like (Cymrillians, especially, but also the Ariane and one or two others I can't think of at the moment).

I don't have a problem with "Not-elves" but lets call a spade a spade.

 

[hong]

To infinity... AND BEYOND!

 

[xechnao]

To infinity... AND BEYOND!

Well, I think Hong's right here. What you need is experience. If you know what you are doing, you will succeed. If you don't it is wishful thinking. IMO this thread can not help you more than realize you have many things to worry about and that it is not something easy.

Be good.

This is where you should focus if you are interested in such an endeavor (and it is more difficult than it initially may seem to one that does not really understand yet exactly what he is doing). The rest come later.

 

[Particle_Man]

Another advantage to being good at game design might be that, even if you don't make a best-seller, other game designers might take notice and hire you.

Mike Mearls did a great job with various games, and now he works for WOTC.

 

[RFisher]

There's nothing that puts me off a new game more than marketing text that reads like "this is how it's different than D&D".

Yeah.

But that doesn’t put me off as much as doing everything differently than D&D solely for the sake of doing it differently from D&D.

 

[MichaelSomething]

So, for those of us who would like to see someone with a system we prefer challenge WotC for dominance of the generic fantasy RPG market: we need to invent a card game that can bankroll Paizo's RPG line. Any ideas?

I think is the best idea of the thread. As long as they use the same artists/art style from Pathfinder, it can work. Or at least look cool.

While I do share your sentiment, that must be one of the worst analogies in the history of EN World. I think it more apt to say it's like shooting YOURSELF to get a guy's Zune.

Thank you for the correction. Your analogy does make more sense.